Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hampus Hellekant

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keepper consensus. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 04:05, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The result was Keep. - Unlike his victim (see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Björn_Söderberg ) there is a clear consensus to keep in this case, and the subject is notable for more than just one incident. I would suggest some of the material in this article be moved/merged to a higher level overview article but there is less problem with doing BLP related harm to the perpetrator of a crime than to the victim. Therefore keep. ++Lar: t/c 05:17, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above was a double close, arrived at independently... consider this an endorsement of the close. ++Lar: t/c 05:18, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hampus Hellekant

I declined speedy WP:CSD#G10 because it seems like a pretty thoroughly sourced article. It has since been pointed out to me that "neo-nazi" might be a POV term, but since he's described that way in the New York Times article (citation #1), I thought I'd bring it here. See also related AfD: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Björn_Söderberg
Toddst1 (talk) 16:04, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per BLP1E Sceptre ^(talk) 16:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. -- Beloved Freak 16:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Well sourced for a stub! Notable criminal and post-conviction controversies. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
Comment - no basis given by nominator for deletion; article provisionally seems to be likely to meet all usual criteria for a biography. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 17:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I don't really see the reasons for this nomination.--Berig (talk) 18:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per BLP1E Not a noteworthy person.Koolkataid ^(talk) 22:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment regarding reason for nomination CSD:G10 is Pages that serve no purpose but to disparage their subject. That certainly seems like grounds for nomination. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 20:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Disparaging the subject" seems to a be an odd concern. After all, the identities of convicted murderers (and other criminals) is public information under Scandinavian laws and I expect that to be the case in most other juristictions. Google has around 1,000 non-Wikipedia related hits for his name so his actions are hardly a secret. Valentinian ^{T / C} 20:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per SchmuckyTheCat. Violent crimes and in particular Nazi crimes is very unusual in Scandinavia. Please note that Koolkataid is likely a sock or single-purpose account. It has made no other edits except the "no" vote above. Valentinian ^{T / C} 20:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep major crime, wide coverage, NPOV per NYT quote. Unless of course we decide we only want to cover living people about whom there are favorable things to say. DGG (talk) 19:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Everything stated in the article is true and confirmed. Why even discuss this matter?!--David Igra (talk) 11:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep These pages serve the purpose of INFORMING the public of his deeds. If his deeds are disparaging, as you say, to him, well then, he should've thought about that BEFORE murdering an innocent man. If every murderer's and every other person's feelings were to be cared for in the fashion you advocate, this Wikipedia project would contain little more than a few megabytes of information. I say with a strong voice: KEEP this article as is!!! I care a thousand times more for his victims than him, the fact that he's out after such a heinous crime is a crime itself!--Karl Svensson (talk) 12:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep No reason mentioned why this should be deleted. /Slarre (talk) 15:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep No reason mentioned in the nom why this should be deleted! BLP1E is not applicable here because he is now famous from the expulsion from medical school as well (and the question whether murderers should be allowed into med. school). Ulner (talk) 19:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Why remove if it is the truth? He is murderer.--Salvatore46 (talk) 08:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:BLP is not an issue as the article is well-sourced and everything in it is - as far as I can see - verifiable. All the Swedish sources are not excellent (Expressen and Aftonbladet are both tabloids, Dagens Nyheter however is more reputable) but there is no question but that this is a notable person. This was a very high-profile murder case in Sweden and this article is not about disparaging the subject but documenting the case. Note that press ethics practices concerning publicizing people's names are stricter in Sweden than in some other countries, which means that names of people who are charged but not convicted of murder are generally not publicized; Hellekant's name is not in the Dagens Nyheter article because although it was well after he was convicted of the killing, he hadn't committed a crime in connection with the medical school issue. --Bonadea (talk) 08:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.